Rik van Riel wrote:
The main difference between Linux and Netware here is the
fact that Linux has a real userland, which can touch the
pages on its own without going through the kernel.
This causes "spontaneously" dirtied or accessed pages,
meaning that we really want to use the hardware
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Rik van Riel wrote:
The main difference between Linux and Netware here is the
fact that Linux has a real userland, which can touch the
pages on its own without going through the kernel.
This causes "spontaneously" dirtied or accessed pages,
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
In NetWare, we didn't care if the page was touched or not since we
used our own bits in field bits 11-9 to store page specific stuff,
like whether the page was dirty or not.
Linux does actually look at both bits, but the
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:46:15 -0600,
"Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Ted. I know, but a kernel debugger is one of those nasty pieaces
of software that can quickly get out of sync if it's maintained
separately from the tree -- the speed at which changes occur in Linux
would
Keith,
If you are volunteering to maintain the MANOS debugger after I hack it
into Linux, then I accept. I'll give you an ftp and telnet account on
vger.timpanogas.org and you can run with it.
:-)
Jeff
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
Who pays you?
Keith Owens wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:19:14 -0600,
"Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who pays you?
I used to work on kdb in my own time, for free. Then I joined SGI and
now I get paid to work on it. If I left SGI I would continue to work
on kdb, the original kdb developer left SGI but still
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 16:24:32 -0600,
"Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keith,
If you are volunteering to maintain the MANOS debugger after I hack it
into Linux, then I accept. I'll give you an ftp and telnet account on
vger.timpanogas.org and you can run with it.
How on earth did you
The code is at vger.timpanogas.org. If you want to review it, it's
there. We are posting another MANOS kernel with full VM end of the
month. The version Darren and I are hacking on now has the debugger
broken out as a module as a prelude to put it in Linux. I am working on
your kdb stubs in
"David S. Miller" wrote:
Date:Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:14:03 -0600
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linus' apparently did not understand this, or he would have
immediately realized that double locking was always generating a
second non-cacheable memory reference
"Jeff V. Merkey" wrote:
"David S. Miller" wrote:
Date:Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:14:03 -0600
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linus' apparently did not understand this, or he would have
immediately realized that double locking was always generating a
second
Date:Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:14:03 -0600
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Linus' apparently did not understand this, or he would have
immediately realized that double locking was always generating a
second non-cacheable memory reference for every lock being taken
Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > already there, so folks can use it on Linux for now, and I'll stick to printk()
> > and code reviews for my debugging on Linux.
>
> Jeff, does it mean that you do not use code reviews on other projects?
>
> It's not that
arrgghh jeff...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> One of the principal architects at Compaq called me Friday after
> reading Linus' email about not caring about commercial or support
> issues for commercialization of Linux on this topic-- his right
yes it his right. he cares about
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> already there, so folks can use it on Linux for now, and I'll stick to printk()
> and code reviews for my debugging on Linux.
Jeff, does it mean that you do not use code reviews on other projects?
It's not that hard to answer - just 1 bit of
Nathan Paul Simons wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:15:31AM -0700, J. Dow wrote:
> > Properly contemplated and I wonder at the hypocrisy of using a compiler
> > or an assembler instead of carefully hand crafted bits on a blank disk.
>
> i think you miss the point. i think that Linus
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nathan Paul
Simons writes:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:15:31AM -0700, J. Dow wrote:
> > Properly contemplated and I wonder at the hypocrisy of using a compiler
> > or an assembler instead of carefully hand crafted bits on a blank disk.
>
> i think you miss
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:15:31AM -0700, J. Dow wrote:
> Properly contemplated and I wonder at the hypocrisy of using a compiler
> or an assembler instead of carefully hand crafted bits on a blank disk.
i think you miss the point. i think that Linus is trying to say
something along the
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> I've found more bugs by "working half crippled" (as you call it). I do
> agree with Linus that people who rely mainly on debuggers for finding and
> fixing bugs are on the whole bad programmers, I've had to deal with more
I've resisted from
"J. Dow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> And for my severely depreciated $0.02 I am becoming concerned
> that these guys are more concerned about some macho ideal of
> generating programs while half crippled than about having things
> work properly and maintainably no matter what gets in the
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> It's not whether you can use tools to do the work.
>
> It's about what kind of people you get.
This makes a lot of sense. Stop there and you are done. But...
> ...in the end, maybe the rule to only use hand power makes sense. Not
> because hand-power is _better_.
Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
>
> Rather than discussing what he's said, I ask: OK, if an integrated kernel
> debugger is inimical to developing more gurus, what contributions would
> Linus welcome?
>
> More documentation, so that more people can understand more deeply?
>
> Cleanup
OK, I give in, I'll post some opinions in this advocacy-like thread.
One of the original connotations of "hacker" was someone who made
furniture with an axe.
There is a difference between a debugger and a compiler. A compiler
never substitutes for understanding. In fact, I gain more
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:23:43 -0700, "J. Dow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>From: "Stephen E. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
>> > > if
From: "Stephen E. Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > >
> > > Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
> > > if used properly.
> >
> > I think you missed the point of my original reply
From: "Linus Torvalds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Yes, using a power-drill and other tools makes a lot of carpentry easier.
> To the point that a lot of carpenters don't even use their hands much any
> more. Almost all the "carpentry" today is 99% automated, and sure, it
> works wonderfuly -
From: "Linus Torvalds" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, using a power-drill and other tools makes a lot of carpentry easier.
To the point that a lot of carpenters don't even use their hands much any
more. Almost all the "carpentry" today is 99% automated, and sure, it
works wonderfuly - especially as
From: "Stephen E. Clark" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
if used properly.
I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
The
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:23:43 -0700, "J. Dow" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
From: "Stephen E. Clark" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
if used properly.
I think
Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
Rather than discussing what he's said, I ask: OK, if an integrated kernel
debugger is inimical to developing more gurus, what contributions would
Linus welcome?
More documentation, so that more people can understand more deeply?
Cleanup patches, to
Linus Torvalds wrote:
It's not whether you can use tools to do the work.
It's about what kind of people you get.
This makes a lot of sense. Stop there and you are done. But...
...in the end, maybe the rule to only use hand power makes sense. Not
because hand-power is _better_. But
"J. Dow" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
And for my severely depreciated $0.02 I am becoming concerned
that these guys are more concerned about some macho ideal of
generating programs while half crippled than about having things
work properly and maintainably no matter what gets in the way.
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
I've found more bugs by "working half crippled" (as you call it). I do
agree with Linus that people who rely mainly on debuggers for finding and
fixing bugs are on the whole bad programmers, I've had to deal with more
I've resisted from
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nathan Paul
Simons writes:
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:15:31AM -0700, J. Dow wrote:
Properly contemplated and I wonder at the hypocrisy of using a compiler
or an assembler instead of carefully hand crafted bits on a blank disk.
i think you miss the
Nathan Paul Simons wrote:
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 12:15:31AM -0700, J. Dow wrote:
Properly contemplated and I wonder at the hypocrisy of using a compiler
or an assembler instead of carefully hand crafted bits on a blank disk.
i think you miss the point. i think that Linus is
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
already there, so folks can use it on Linux for now, and I'll stick to printk()
and code reviews for my debugging on Linux.
Jeff, does it mean that you do not use code reviews on other projects?
It's not that hard to answer - just 1 bit of
arrgghh jeff...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
One of the principal architects at Compaq called me Friday after
reading Linus' email about not caring about commercial or support
issues for commercialization of Linux on this topic-- his right
yes it his right. he cares about the
Alexander Viro wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
already there, so folks can use it on Linux for now, and I'll stick to printk()
and code reviews for my debugging on Linux.
Jeff, does it mean that you do not use code reviews on other projects?
It's not that hard to
Date:Sun, 10 Sep 2000 18:14:03 -0600
From: "Jeff V. Merkey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linus' apparently did not understand this, or he would have
immediately realized that double locking was always generating a
second non-cacheable memory reference for every lock being taken
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
>
> The _technical_ side of the tool in question is completely secondary.
>
> The social engineering side is very real, and immediate.
>
> It's not whether you can use tools to do the work.
>
> It's
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> >
> > Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
> > if used properly.
>
> I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
>
> The _technical_ side of the tool in question is
[reposted for the benefit of anyone wondering what Linus was replying to]
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > I use revision control at work. We use CVS on steroids - CVS with a lo tof
> > the extensions available, and with a "mad
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
>
> Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
> if used properly.
I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
The _technical_ side of the tool in question is completely secondary.
The social
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linus Torvalds) wrote on 06.09.00 in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> >
> > very nice monologue, thanks. It would be great to know Linus' opinion. I
> > mean, I knew Linus' opinion of some years' ago but perhaps it changed? He
> > is a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linus Torvalds) wrote on 06.09.00 in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
very nice monologue, thanks. It would be great to know Linus' opinion. I
mean, I knew Linus' opinion of some years' ago but perhaps it changed? He
is a living being
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
if used properly.
I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
The _technical_ side of the tool in question is completely secondary.
The social
[reposted for the benefit of anyone wondering what Linus was replying to]
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I use revision control at work. We use CVS on steroids - CVS with a lo tof
the extensions available, and with a "mad scientists
Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier
if used properly.
I think you missed the point of my original reply completely.
The _technical_ side of the tool in question is completely
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Apparently, if you follow the arguments, not having a kernel debugger
> leads to various maladies:
> - you crash when something goes wrong, and you fsck and it takes forever
>and you get frustrated.
> - people have given up on Linux kernel
> There are people today that refuse to use computers for writeing,
> and they have good arguments, ...
Harken back to David Miller, who wrote about occupying his hands
with something to keep them the hell off the keyboard while he is
meditating on a screen full of code.
One of my debugging
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure. I just don't see many end-users single-stepping through
> interrupt handlers etc.
>
> But yes, there probably are a few.
I think you would be surprised, and I speak as someone who has found
and fixed race conditions in your kernel.
There are
On 6 Sep 2000, at 14:03, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Think of rabbits. And think of how the wolf helps them in the end. Not
> by being nice, no. But the rabbits breed, and they are better for having
> to worry a bit.
No matter how much
Now that is what I want on a t-shirt. ;)
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Now, centuries-old theological arguments may well be of supreme
> importance in some ways -- an undeniably subjective and personal
> judgment -- but in terms of Linux kernel development they are usually
>
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Sure. I just don't see many end-users single-stepping through
interrupt handlers etc.
But yes, there probably are a few.
I think you would be surprised, and I speak as someone who has found
and fixed race conditions in your kernel.
There are more
There are people today that refuse to use computers for writeing,
and they have good arguments, ...
Harken back to David Miller, who wrote about occupying his hands
with something to keep them the hell off the keyboard while he is
meditating on a screen full of code.
One of my debugging tools
Timur,
> Well, if it really is just his hobby, then he shouldn't be chanting the "World
> Domination" mantra. Either Linux belongs to Linus, in which case it's
> irrelevant outside his personal world, or it is a tool for all computer users.
> If Linus really doesn't care who uses his OS, then he
From: "Horst von Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> "J. Dow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> [...]
>
> > The point is that WITH a debugger you have to take that step as well.
> > A person without the self discipline to do that is still a child and should
> > not be in this business. The debugger gives
[Tigran]
> > I like this one even better:
> >
> > "Little children, keep yourselves from idols" -- St John, Ist century.
[rgooch]
> Hm. Does that apply also to all the statues of saints, the virgin
> mother and all those crosses with Jesus that you find in churches,
> hanging off people's
Jamie Lokier wrote:
> World Domination is my hobby too :-)
Now, that is THE T-shirt! What should be added? A flock of penguins
in an attack mode. :-)
--mj
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > scale in the end. We'll either see forking, see another OS like FreeBSD
> > fill the void, or (worst case) Solaris.
>
> Somehow I doubt that arguments from marketshare/field circus/etc. peppered
> with
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> > [...] Hardware problems require a debugger or logic analyzer to fix.
> > [...]
>
> 'kernel problems need a kernel debugger to fix'. How wrong.
It says "hardware problems" not "kernel problems". read it again.
:-)
Jeff
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> [...] Hardware problems require a debugger or logic analyzer to fix.
> [...]
'kernel problems need a kernel debugger to fix'. How wrong.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message
Timur Tabi wrote:
> Well, if it really is just his hobby, then he shouldn't be chanting
> the "World Domination" mantra.
Why not? World Domination is my hobby too :-)
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
** Reply to message from "J. Dow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 7 Sep 2000
02:50:37 -0700
> Aw, Tigran, give the kid his hobby, OK? We can try to bang some
> sense into his head and suggest ways his hobby could offer more
> satisfaction from good results achieved and make it more fun for
> the
Tigran Aivazian writes:
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
> > I like this one better:
> >
> > "And I'm right. I'm always right, but in this case I'm just a bit more
> > right than I usually am." -- Linus Torvalds, Sunday Aug 27, 2000.
> >
>
> I like this one even better:
>
>
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Mike Jagdis wrote:
> > Q: Then why isn't kdb in the kernel?
> > A: Uh...
>
> More to the point, why don't the people that want a kernel
> debugger maintain kdb and simply drop in the patch when they
> need it? If Jeff releases his debugger will anyone care enough
> to
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I have no axe to grind, but I do have a different view. I'm the 1 in 30
> million men born with an extra Y chromosone (a double YY), so you are
> pertially right there. DOuble YY males have a different brain structure
> -- the lymbic system in my
"J. Dow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> The point is that WITH a debugger you have to take that step as well.
> A person without the self discipline to do that is still a child and should
> not be in this business. The debugger gives you a better picture of what
> is actually happening. If
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 6 Sep 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Jeff V. Merkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guarantee you that IT managers and CTOs do not share your enthusiasm for
> slow, correct coding when faced with their business being down,
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Dan Hollis wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > For things like driver debugging its the only way to work. Hardware simply does
> > not work like the manual says and no amount of Zen contemplation will ever
> > make you at one with a 3c905B ethernet card.
>
>
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Which Linux companies are profitable? **NONE**.
That's a statement with balls, which I would really see with some
numbers..
Igmar
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If this is your primary argument for a kernel debugger, a 'crash dump tool
>with extra controls', then why not just cleanly implement a 'crash dump
>tool with extra controls'.
What about an enhanced printk tool that virtually inserts conditional
> On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
>
> > Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:52:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > [... words of wisdom removed for brevity ...]
> > >
> > > I'm a bastard, and proud of it!
> > >
> > >
Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
> [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>
> >I'm really kind of surprised that companies like SuSE, VA and RedHat
> >haven't started talking about forking the kernel already. Those companies
> >are serving the administrators and managers whose needs you are openly
> >admitting
> Q: Then why isn't kdb in the kernel?
> A: Uh...
More to the point, why don't the people that want a kernel
debugger maintain kdb and simply drop in the patch when they
need it? If Jeff releases his debugger will anyone care enough
to maintain it? Less talk, more action methinks :-).
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > Ehh? And exactly _how_ would a debugger help it.
> > >
> > > Especially as Alan quoted an example of a driver bug that didn't get fixed
> > > for several months because the maintainer didn't have the hardware.
> > >
> > >
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
> Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:52:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > [... words of wisdom removed for brevity ...]
> >
> > I'm a bastard, and proud of it!
> >
> > Linus
> >
> >
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:52:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> [... words of wisdom removed for brevity ...]
>
> I'm a bastard, and proud of it!
>
> Linus
>
> Anyone else think copyleft could make a shirt from this?
I like this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Which Linux companies are profitable? **NONE**. The only people
> making money are hardware vendors and it's a model like SUN's, where
> you get a free "machine driver" with every system you buy.
And nobody has explained to me why these are _bad_ things.
--
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> scale in the end. We'll either see forking, see another OS like FreeBSD
> fill the void, or (worst case) Solaris.
Somehow I doubt that arguments from marketshare/field circus/etc. peppered
with threats of coprorat world turning to Solaris, etc.
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
scale in the end. We'll either see forking, see another OS like FreeBSD
fill the void, or (worst case) Solaris.
Somehow I doubt that arguments from marketshare/field circus/etc. peppered
with threats of coprorat world turning to Solaris, etc.
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:52:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[... words of wisdom removed for brevity ...]
I'm a bastard, and proud of it!
Linus
Anyone else think copyleft could make a shirt from this?
I like this one
Q: Then why isn't kdb in the kernel?
A: Uh...
More to the point, why don't the people that want a kernel
debugger maintain kdb and simply drop in the patch when they
need it? If Jeff releases his debugger will anyone care enough
to maintain it? Less talk, more action methinks :-).
Christer Weinigel wrote:
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
I'm really kind of surprised that companies like SuSE, VA and RedHat
haven't started talking about forking the kernel already. Those companies
are serving the administrators and managers whose needs you are openly
admitting that you are
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 12:52:29PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[... words of wisdom removed for brevity ...]
I'm a bastard, and proud of it!
Linus
Anyone else
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
For things like driver debugging its the only way to work. Hardware simply does
not work like the manual says and no amount of Zen contemplation will ever
make you at one with a 3c905B ethernet card.
This is
Tigran Aivazian writes:
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, George Anzinger wrote:
I like this one better:
"And I'm right. I'm always right, but in this case I'm just a bit more
right than I usually am." -- Linus Torvalds, Sunday Aug 27, 2000.
I like this one even better:
"Little children,
Timur Tabi wrote:
Well, if it really is just his hobby, then he shouldn't be chanting
the "World Domination" mantra.
Why not? World Domination is my hobby too :-)
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ingo Molnar wrote:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
[...] Hardware problems require a debugger or logic analyzer to fix.
[...]
'kernel problems need a kernel debugger to fix'. How wrong.
It says "hardware problems" not "kernel problems". read it again.
:-)
Jeff
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
scale in the end. We'll either see forking, see another OS like FreeBSD
fill the void, or (worst case) Solaris.
Somehow I doubt that arguments from marketshare/field circus/etc. peppered
with threats
Jamie Lokier wrote:
World Domination is my hobby too :-)
Now, that is THE T-shirt! What should be added? A flock of penguins
in an attack mode. :-)
--mj
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the
[Tigran]
I like this one even better:
"Little children, keep yourselves from idols" -- St John, Ist century.
[rgooch]
Hm. Does that apply also to all the statues of saints, the virgin
mother and all those crosses with Jesus that you find in churches,
hanging off people's necks and
Timur,
Well, if it really is just his hobby, then he shouldn't be chanting the "World
Domination" mantra. Either Linux belongs to Linus, in which case it's
irrelevant outside his personal world, or it is a tool for all computer users.
If Linus really doesn't care who uses his OS, then he
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Damien Miller wrote:
> >
> > > Tools like a KDB would make the kernel a lot more accessible to the
> > > time-poor.
> >
> > Kdb is available to all. I think it should be _integrated_ mostly
> >
On 2000-09-06T12:52:29,
Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
I do agree with your assessment.
Except for a single point:
> And quite frankly, for most of the real problems (as opposed to the stupid
> bugs - of which there are many, as the latest crap with "truncate()" has
> shown us) a
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > If you'd read what I wrote in it's entirety, you'd know that I'm very well
> > aware of this perspective.
>
> I read it. I just didn't agree with the level of importance I felt you
> were assigning to
> your email inundation by one. Er, why's the list setup without
> a reply-to the list?)
lists that add "reply-to: list" degenerate to chat rooms.
so this is social-engineering, just like the lack of builtin kernel debugger.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> It cuts the other way as well though. If it is prohibitively hard and
> difficult to get fixes out for bugs in the Linux kernel, then companies
> will tend to choose other operating systems to run their applications on.
So what? I have been running Linux from
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If you'd read what I wrote in it's entirety, you'd know that I'm very well
> aware of this perspective.
I read it. I just didn't agree with the level of importance I felt you
were assigning to corporate use.
> I don't need to have the volumes of
> Or, to misquote Feynman (another cantankorous bastard, but proud of it):
>
> "Look at the problem. Think really hard. And write the correct code."
In a smallish voice I note that the debugger helps you look at the problem.
It is your X-Ray vision.
{o.o}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send
Quoth Linus
> Apparently, if you follow the arguments, not having a kernel debugger
> leads to various maladies:
> - you crash when something goes wrong, and you fsck and it takes forever
>and you get frustrated.
> - people have given up on Linux kernel programming because it's too hard
>
101 - 200 of 272 matches
Mail list logo
